THE WAIPA POST. Printed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. SATURDAY, 16th JUNE, 1934. A TIMELY WARNING.

Waipa Post, Volume 48, Issue 3480, 16 June 1934, Page 4

THE WAIPA POST. Printed on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. SATURDAY, 16th JUNE, 1934. A TIMELY WARNING.

APART altogether from any general need for tariff adjustment in New Zealand, the statement made by the Minister of Finance yesterday is both reassuring and timely. The suggestion that New Zealand had violated the intention, if not the agreement, of the Ottawa Conference has been made so often that it is a commonplace belief that our Government has been guilty of the neglect of an obvious and an honourable undertaking. Mr Coates is able to set these doubts at rest when he refers to those who are leading a series of public resolutions at the present time: “ Everyone appreciates the public spirit shown,” says Mr Coates, ‘‘but it is not to say that they are the last word on trade relations between Great Britain and New Zealand, nor on the more limited * issue of our fulfilment of the Ottawa agreement.” Wjhich leads the. Minister to an explanation of what has taken and is taking place: “ All these assertions are untrue. They are pernicious, to the extent that they are circulated, falsely stating the position as between New Zealand and Great Britain. It is true that there was delay in commencing the inquiry into our tariff, but why did this delay occur ? It was especially requested by the British Government, so that the manufacturers of Great Britain could have the opportunity of preparing their case.”

It can be accepted that Mr Coates is best, qualified to recite the history of all that has happened in the days following the parleys at Ottawa, and it is reassuring indeed to learn that any delay was inspired by Britain. As though to emphasise the point, Mr Coates goes further when he sa)ys certain adjustments were m,ade “ without the loss of a single day after the Government was able, by arrangement with the British Government, to make known the terms of the agreement.” Plainly, so far as Ottawa goes, the tariff reformers have a poor case indeed. The bogey of delay is lost to them, and it resolves itself - purely into a question of fiscal policy on its merits. (Rather cynically, perhaps, Mr Coates alludes to the present campaign as a public entertainment, but behind this there is unquestionably a great truth which cannot be too strongly emphasised at the present timfe. The mood of the moment is strangely favourable for the critic of Governlment policy, and public audiences are too apt to be swayed by oratory of a nature which Mr Coates calls entertainment. The public should be on guard. It can be recognised, surely, that in adversity individual judgments are easily swayed, and, as that is the fact, clearly the advocate of any reform has an audience which is unusually responsive to his pleadings. After all, a public resolution calls for the exercise of care, since, if it is to he seriously regarded by those in authority, it should arise out of a proper sense of responsibility. Evidently Mr Coates realises that public mood finds a too-ready expression these days when he says:

“Madhine-made resolutions are pretty well valueless at any time. When they are based on false information given to the public their value is still less.”

Mr Coates has spoken with blunt candour, and the pity is that he should have had cause to do so. Yet, at the same time, who can deny the wisdom of his words? Looking back over the last two years, the number of contradictory resolutions cheerfully and good-naturedly passed by people under spur of a pleading for reform would defy description. It may be suggested that many people to-day are incapable of expressing an opinion that could be seriously regarded by anyone—even including themselves — because their opinions may be likened to a sand-drift along the shore.W!hat is needed,’ and the explanation Mr Coates now offers seems to

emphasise the fact, is a wider sense of responsibility. Tariffs are an, exceedingly intricate affair of State; moreover, they are strangely sensitive in their international bearing; and, as was previously remarked in these columns, it is not a novelty for an agitation for tariff revision to arise out of some selfish desire. It is a fact that freedom from tariff can serve to swell the profits of an importer who shelters behind his tarifftaxed competitor on a market. It is a fact, also, that tariffs are an extremely dangerous subject for an audience which sees only some popular fancy instead of a realty important State policy. Mr Coates may have unceremoniously, even bluntly, cautioned audiences from an overindulgence in entertainment in their consideration of serious problems, but it is yet true that even a public administrator qan be cruel to be kind !